Like this:

Some people say that Arab Muslims are “native Palestinians“, while Jews are “invaders” and “settlers“.

But when I read the biographies of Israeli and ‘Palestinian’ political leaders, I was confused.

Who was born in ‘Palestine’ ?

ISRAELI LEADERS:

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, Born 21 October 1949 in Tel Aviv.

EHUD BARAK,Born 12 February 1942 in Mishmar HaSharon, British Mandate of Palestine

ARIEL SHARON, Born 26 February 1928 in Kfar Malal, British Mandate of Palestine

EHUD OLMERT, Born 30 September 1945 in Binyamina-Giv’at Ada, British Mandate of Palestine

ITZHAK RABIN,Born 1 March 1922 in Jerusalem, British Mandate of Palestine.

ITZHAK NAVON,Israeli President in 1977-1982. Born 9 April 1921 in Jerusalem, British Mandate of Palestine.

EZER WEIZMAN, Israeli President in 1993-2000. Born 15 June 1924 in Tel Aviv, British Mandate of Palestine.

MUSLIM ‘palestinian’ LEADERS:

YASSER ARAFAT, Born 24 August 1929 in Cairo, Egypt

SAEB BERAKAT,Born April 28, 1955, in Jordan. He has Jordanian citizenship.

FAISAL ABDEL QADERAL-HUSSEINI,Born in1948 in Bagdad, Iraq.

SARI NUSSEIBEH,Born in 1949 in Damascus, Syria.

MAHMOUD AL-ZAHAR, Born in 1945, in Cairo, Egypt.

Just to refresh your memory, the state of Israel was borne on May 14, 1948, following the Balfur (British Minister for Foreign Affairs) on 2 Nov. 1917 and the British victory over the Ottomans who ruled Palestine for almost 200 years, and were the German Allies in W.W I.

So following the Zeise Picko pact, in 1920 the British received from the U.N the Mandate to rule over Palestine and care for the Jewish Home Land.

Therefore, Palestinians are those who were born in ‘British Mandate of Palestine’ up to 14 May, 1948

***

Israeli leaders, who were born in Palestine are “native Palestinians” (NOT “settlers or invaders”)

The *first* Muslim ‘palestinian’ Leaders were born in Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Tunisia, and THEY were the *invaders* and *occupiers* of the Jewish State of Israel.

91 yearshas passed since the birth of the “Mandate for Palestine,” an historical League of Nations document, that laid down the Jewish legal right to settle anywhere in western Palestine, the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, an entitlement unaltered in international law.

The “Mandate for Palestine” was not a naive vision briefly embraced by the international community. Fifty-one member countries—the entire League of Nations—unanimously declared on July 24, 1922:

“Whereas recognition has been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.”

It is important to point out that political rights to self-determination as a polity for Arabs, were guaranteed by the same League of Nations in four other mandates—in Lebanon and Syria [The French Mandate], Iraq, and later Trans-Jordan [The British Mandate].

Any attempt to negate the Jewish people’s right to Palestine—Eretz-Israel, and to deny them access and control in the area designated for the Jewish people by the League of Nations is a serious infringement of international law.

Continuous pressure from the “Quartet” [U.S., the European Union, the UN and Russia] to surrender parts of Eretz-Israel are contrary to international law that firmly calls to “encourage … close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.” It also requires the Mandatory for “seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the government of any foreign power.”

In their attempt to establish peace between the Jewish state and its Arab neighbors, the nations of the world should remember who the lawful sovereign nation is with its rights anchored in international law and valid to this day:

To get an idea of how many businesses have been taken over by the MB, check the holdings of just one man and one conglomerate – Prince Alwaleed’s Kingdom Holding Company (he’s a 95% owner) here. Look carefully at the list.

Please know that the Muslim Brotherhood has spent the last 50-60 years buying up businesses, including media properties (or buying significant positions in newspapers, studios, TV and radio stations, book publishers, magazines, websites, social media, etc.), so incidents like this anti-Semitic expulsion from hotel grounds won’t be widely reported. (Of course, the Left (Soros and company controls the message as well).

What I am elucidating here is that what transpired at the Shangri-La will primarily be transmitted on a word-of-mouth basis and through our email and Internet channels (also our limited radio venues). Under normal conditions OR if blacks, homosexuals or Muslims had been targeted, a protest outside of the hotel would have a significant impact and receive broad media coverage. As the victims are Jews, MB and government control of the news will preempt that process.

To get an idea of how many businesses have been taken over by the MB, check the holdings of just one man and one conglomerate – Prince Alwaleed’s Kingdom Holding Company (he’s a 95% owner) here. Look carefully at the list.

EACH item on this list – ONE listing – can represent hundreds of entities. For example, Fox News’ parent company, News Corporation (just ONE listing) is the 2nd largest media group in the world and the 3rd largest entertainment group in the world. Below is THEIR extensive list of media/entertainment properties. THIS shows you how BIG the problem of Muslim Brotherhood infiltration and control of America is! Remember, below is the complete list of holdings for “News Corporation” ONLY.

TV

News Corp agreed to sell eight of its television stations to Oak Hill Capital Partners for approximately $1.1 billion as of 22 December 2007. The stations are US Fox affiliates.[45] These stations, along with those already acquired by Oak Hill that were formerly owned by The New York Times Company, formed the nucleus of Oak Hill’s Local TV LLC division.

Fox Soccer Plus, a sister network to FSC, but including coverage of other sports, most notably rugby. Launched in 2010 after News Corporation picked up many of the broadcast rights abandoned by Setanta Sports when it stopped broadcasting in the U.S.

FX Networks, a cable network broadcasting reruns of programming previously shown on other channels, but recently creating its own programming, including the Emmy Award-winning programs The Shield and Damages.

“May He who blessed our forefathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, bless the soldiers of the Israel Defence Forces, who stand watch over our land and the cities of our Lord, from the Lebanese border to the desert of Egypt and from the great sea to the verge of the wilderness, on land, in the air, and at sea. May God strike down before them our enemies who rise against us. May the Holy One save and spare our soldiers from all forms of woe and distress, of affliction and illness, and may He invest their every action with blessing and success. May he vanquish by their means those who hate us, and may He adorn them with a crown of deliverance and a mantle of victory. Thus may the verse be fulfilled: “For it is the Lord your God who marches with you to do battle for you against your enemy, to bring you victory. Now let us respond. Amen. ”

Prayer for the State of Israel

“Our Father in Heaven, Rock and Redeemer of the people Israel; Bless the State of Israel, with its promise of redemption. Shield it with Your love; spread over it the shelter of Your peace. Guide its leaders and advisors with Your light and Your truth. Help them with Your good counsel. Strengthen the hands of those who defend our Holy Land. Deliver them; crown their efforts with triumph. Bless the land with peace, and its inhabitants with lasting joy. And let us say: Amen.” — (translation from Siddur Sim Shalom

As a defamer of his fellow Jews, Noam Chomsky is in a class of his own. “Hitler’s conceptions,” he once wrote, “have struck a responsive chord in current Zionist commentary.” Israel, he added, is guilty of planning a “final solution” for humanity, an apocalypse from which “few will escape.” The world-famous MIT professor and far-left intellectual guru has described the PLO as “heroic,” while vilifying America’s Jewish community as “deeply totalitarian.” He has collaborated with Holocaust deniers, allowing them to publish and distribute his books, and he gave hisendorsementto an antisemitic author (the late Israel Shahak) who alleged that observant Jews pray to the Devil.

But these efforts pale before the cause that has animated Chomsky for the past decade. That cause is solidarity with the blood-drenched perpetrators of Islamist terror.

The fact that Iran’s rulers want to annihilate Israel is not in dispute among informed people. The ayatollahs and their accessories have characterized the Jewish state as a “cancerous tumor” that must be “uprooted from the region,” a “dried, rotten tree that will collapse with a single storm,” a “filthy microbe,” a “stinking corpse,” a “germ of corruption” that “will be wiped off the face of the world.” But as Chomsky sees it, “Israel and the United States are both threatening Iran with destruction.” Iran, declares Chomsky, would be “crazy” not to build nuclear bombs to counter this threat.

In 2006, Chomsky visited Lebanon, where he basked in the warm affections of Hezbollah. These terrorists, he announced, are perfectly justified in keeping their arms (which include tens of thousands of rockets aimed at Israel’s civilian population) as a “deterrent to potential aggression.” Some may recall the uses to which Hezbollah’s weapons have already been put: the slaughter of hundreds of American peacekeepers, the destruction of American and Israeli embassies, the indiscriminate bombardment of Israeli towns and cities, the massacre of Jews as far afield as Argentina. Was it for this, one wonders, that Chomsky allowed himself to be filmed greeting leaders of Hezbollah as long-lost friends?

Interviewed on Lebanese television, Chomsky gave further insight into his political allegiances. “The policies of Hamas,” he insisted, “are more forthcoming and more conducive to a peaceful settlement than those of the United States or Israel… The policies, in my view, are unacceptable, but preferable to the policies of the United States and Israel.” Viewers may well have been perplexed at the sight of this Jewish academic who apparently considers the demand for the murder of all Jews – clearly stated in the Hamas covenant – preferable to Israel’s official support for the two-state solution.

Evidently unsatisfied with mere apologetics for Hamas, Chomsky has now decided to show his fellowship with the jihadists in person. Visiting Gaza in October – shortly before the latest rocket attacks on Israeli towns and cities – Chomsky spoke at the Islamic University, an institutionestablished by Hamas founder Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and recognized as a training ground for the Hamas leadership. Bestowing intellectual legitimacy on this terrorist front by attending an “international conference on languages and literature,” he also received an honorary doctorate for his anti-Israel activities, and rewarded his hosts by demanding an end to the blockade of the Hamas enclave. His words having met with the approval of the terror masters, Chomsky was granted an audience with none other than the Hamas prime minister, Ismail Haniyeh, who hailed his “courageous positions in support of the Palestinian people.”

Even as he consorted with this dispatcher of suicide bombers, a man involved in the murder and mutilation of hundreds of innocent Jews, Chomsky’s traveling companions (most of them linguistics professors) brazenly insisted that nothing was amiss. In a public statement on the situation, they conceded that American academics “are prevented by law from having any contact with the government in Gaza,” and cited “assurances” (worthless, of course) that the Islamic University is not linked to Hamas. But they labored in vain to conceal the truth: that the conference at the university was a mere pretext for assignations with terrorists. “Additional events,” they confessed, “were organized solely for Noam Chomsky,” and among those events were “meetings with Palestinian politicians (including the elected prime minister)” – that is to say, private sessions with figures from Hamas, including Ismail Haniyeh. Here, then, is an admission by his own supporters that Chomsky has been fraternizing with the Hamas leadership, possibly in violation of American law.

Just how important is Chomsky? Why should anyone care that he is rubbing shoulders with some of the world’s most evil terrorists? The answer is that Chomsky was voted “the world’s top public intellectual” by over 4,000 readers of Foreign Policy magazine. His book 9-11, which denied bin Laden’s guilt for the September 11 mass murders, sold 300,000 copies. Wherever he travels, he addresses packed audiences and elicits rapturous applause. In Britain, one of his diatribes wasbroadcast in Manchester city center by the BBC. When he tried to visit Ireland on an expired passport a few years ago, the country’s foreign minister intervened to grant him entry. As a result, cheering crowds were able to watch him denounce the Irish Government for war crimes, confuse the then-presidents of Egypt and Pakistan, and warn that American policies would culminate in an “Armageddon of our own making.”

Over his long public career, Noam Chomsky has plumbed the depths of political iniquity, from support for Maoist China (“quite admirable”) and apologetics for Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge (“may actually have saved many lives”) to the defense of Holocaust deniers (one of whom he labeled “a relatively apolitical liberal of some sort”) and dismissal of bin Laden’s responsibility for 9/11. Now he describes the Iranian ayatollahs as victims of American and Israeli aggression, while embracing terrorist commanders notorious for their skill in murdering Jews.

When his political activities are called into question, Chomsky reacts by comparing himself to the prophets of the Bible. Perhaps, therefore, he should be judged in light of the words of Isaiah: “the wicked are like the troubled sea, which cannot rest, and whose waters cast up mire and dirt.”

TORONTO — A Palestinian terrorist who fought the Canadian government’s attempts to expel him for 26 years was finally deported to Lebanon on the weekend aboard a flight chartered by the Canada Border Services Agency.

CPMahmoud Mohammad Issa Mohammad, shown in this undated file photo, was deported over the weekend.

Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney was expected to announce the deportation of Mahmoud Mohammad Issa Mohammad, 70, who had been living in southern Ontario since 1987, on Monday afternoon in Ottawa.

The case of the former Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine member had become symbolic of the flaws in Canada’s immigration system, often cited as an example of the government’s inability to control its own borders.

Despite being convicted for attacking an El Al passenger plane in Athens in 1968, Mohammad immigrated to Canada in 1987 by concealing his past. Federal officials began deportation proceedings against him in 1988 but he fended them off by filing appeal after appeal in the courts.

But following one last latest flurry of court appeals two weeks ago, his legal odyssey reached its end. In making the announcement, Mr. Kenney was expected to argue that such a delay could not happen again due to changes introduced by his government.

Many Canadians were angered by Mohammad’s lengthy stay in Canada. After joining the PFLP at age 25, he underwent a month of military training before he was sent to Greece to take part in a terrorist attack.

On Boxing Day, 1968, he and an accomplice stormed a Boeing 707 as it was readying for takeoff. They fired 83 rounds at the plane and lobbed six grenades, killing one passenger. Mohammad was caught and sentenced to 17 years in prison, but in 1970, he was freed after Palestinian terrorists hijacked a Greek airliner and threatened to blow it up unless he was released.

Mohammad moved to Cyprus and then travelled to Spain, where he applied to immigrate to Canada. Together with his wife and three children, he arrived in Canada as an immigrant on Feb. 25, 1987.

It took authorities a year to figure out he had not been truthful when he claimed on his immigration application that he had never been convicted of a crime. An immigration adjudicator ruled in December, 1988, that he should be deported.

But Mohammad then applied for refugee status and, although his claim was rejected, he remained in Canada while his appeals were heard by the courts. Some of his more recent appeals argued he could not be deported because his health was bad and the Lebanese medical system was inadequate.

Dr. Applebaum appeared at the scene of numerous terror attacks in Jerusalem, helping evacuate and treat scores of victims.

In September 2003, on the second anniversary year of the September 11 attacks, Dr. Appelbaum came to New York and discussed best practices in handling emergencies.

He returned home for his daughter Nava’s wedding. The next day, they were killed in an Islamic terrorist bombing attack on the eve of her wedding.

The commandment to “love one’s neighbor” is carried out by Israel’s military and civilians in their responses to disasters around the world — both natural and man-made; at the time of crisis and years later; to both friends and enemies.

The commandment is broader than just loving friends, as the entire quote makes clear. It also covers people that hurt you. It is easy to ignore such people and hold a grudge. The bible directs people to avoid that instinct. Explain the pain; correct the imperfect. There may not be reconciliation, but kindness may lead to dialogue. At a minimum, the positive actions will have a positive impact on your other actions and attitudes.

Remembering Naava Applebaum

A few hours before the bombing, on September 9, Naava Applebaum attended the mikveh (ritual bath), as required by Halakha (Jewish law) for all brides prior to their wedding. She then began helping her family with the wedding arrangements, when her father decided to take her out for a “father-daughter” talk before her wedding. They went to Café Hillel on Emek Refaim Street, in Jerusalem.

On the day of the bombing, September 9, security guards in the vicinity of Café Hillel were told to be on the lookout for a suicide bomber. At around 11:20 pm, a security guard stationed at a nearby pizza parlor noticed a man walking by with a bulky square-shaped box under his shirt.He yelled at the man to stop, but the man refused. The security guard did not want to shoot him in the back, for fear that it would detonate the bomb. A few seconds later, the suicide bomber detonated the bomb close to the entrance of Café Hillel.Nava and her father were entering the cafe at that time.Nava was killed together with her father.She was dead by the time she was reached by paramedics.

Applebaum’s fiancé, Chanan Sand, collapsed in the emergency room of Shaare Zedek Medical Center upon hearing that his fiancée had not survived.She was buried the next day adjacent to her father in the Har HaMenuchot cemetery, in the western part of Jerusalem.

Hundreds of friends and relatives traveling to Israel for the wedding arrived to find that they would be attending her funeral instead, on the day she was supposed to get married. Sand attended the funeral, and placed in her grave the wedding ring he had planned on giving her at the wedding.

When Denial Will End

Denial is likely to continue until the price gets too steep. The 3,000 victims of 9/11, it turns out, did not suffice to shake Western complacency. 30,000 dead, in all likelihood, will also not suffice. Perhaps 300,000 will. For sure, three million will. At that point, worries about Muslim sensibilities and fear of being called an “Islamophobe” will fade into irrelevance, replaced by a single-minded determination to protect lives. Should the existing order someday be in evident danger, today’s relaxed approach will instantly go out the window. The popular support for such measures exists; as early as 2004, aCornell University poll showed that 44 percent of Americans “believe that some curtailment of civil liberties is necessary for Muslim Americans.”[47]

Israel offers a control case. Because it faces so many threats, the body politic lacks patience with liberal pieties when it comes to security. While aspiring to treat everyone fairly, the government clearly targets the most violent-prone elements of society. Should other Western countries face acomparable danger, circumstances will likely compel them to adopt this same approach.

Conversely, should such mass dangers not arise, this shift will probably never take place. Until and unless disaster on a large scale strikes, denial will continue. Western tactics, in other words, depend entirely on the brutality and competence of the Islamist enemy. Ironically, the West permits terrorists to drive its approach to counterterrorism. No less ironically, it will take a huge terrorist atrocity to enable effective counterterrorism.